Free Stuff Versus Free Choice Outcome Of Socialism

"Socialism" infographic cartoon found on Facebook

Free Stuff Versus Free Choice Outcome Of Socialism

This infographic does not show the difference between the needs-satisfaction of Keep Half and the meager usefulness to anyone's life of Progressive Political Government dictated Free Stuff.

People tend to forget that the initial choice of the line on the right in this graphic allows no one person to make individual choices addressing their personal needs on the other side of the doorway.

Comment left at Facebook posting:

Stuart Light - I have never regretted that I commuted as far as 130 miles per day and had a lotta jobs that I did not like but worked hard to keep a roof over my head and paid my bills.

Response:

We, at MAXINE believe - You were able to keep the choices you made for your life ... YOURS!



TAGS: #FreeStuff, #KeepHalf, socialism, Capitalism, work hard, no work, Progressive, fascism, communism, personal freedom, Personal Choice, MAXINE

Mitt - Gingrich Out-Demonize Each Other In Obama-Style Class-Warfare Attacks

Trading accusations of greed, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich challenged each other Monday to return millions made in private business as the race for the GOP presidential nomination turned increasingly acerbic and personal at the start of a three-week sprint to the Iowa caucuses. Image Credit: StarTribune

Mitt - Gingrich Out-Demonize Each Other In Obama-Style Class-Warfare Attacks

Yesterday, Mitt Romney made a point that Newt Gingrich should pay back monies he was paid by Freddie Mac, a money loosing, quasi-government mortgage funding organization, for a consulting services contract he had made with the management.

Newt Gingrich felt compelled to jump ugly back into the fray at Mitt Romney by saying Romney should pay back the monies he made through downsizing corporations to make them more efficient and profitable.

This is a lose-lose tennis match where on one side, it is no one's business what one gets paid for consulting services (just, why is Freddie Mac, and its partner organization, Fannie Mae in business on taxpayer money in the first place?), and on the other hand, the Communist/Socialist argument on Capitalism where corporate leaders are able to benefit personally from an increase in profits due to making a company, and its products more attractive to consumers and the needs the company's efforts fill.

This excerpted and edited from the StarTribune -

Greed is the issue this time: Romney and Gingrich trade barbs as 3-week sprint to Iowa begins
Article by: KASIE HUNT and STEVE PEOPLES , Associated Press - Updated: December 13, 2011 - 1:00 AM

Far from Iowa, the two men campaigned miles apart from each other in next-up New Hampshire, where Romney has long dominated in polls but where Gingrich is aggressively working to make inroads. Romney called on Gingrich to return the estimated $1.6 million he received for providing strategic advice to Freddie Mac, the quasi-government agency that guarantees home mortgages. Gingrich has said he acted as a historian, not a lobbyist.

"That would make him the highest paid historian in history," Romney told Fox News Channel during an interview from the Chez Vachon diner, a regular New Hampshire stop for presidential candidates. He suggested that Gingrich was an ultimate insider who leveraged his position as a former House speaker to line his pockets when he left office. Said Romney: "One of the things that I think people recognize in Washington is that people go there to serve the people and then they stay there to serve themselves."

Gingrich, campaigning in nearby Londonderry, countered quickly, saying that Romney should give back the millions he made working at Bain Capital, a venture capital firm that sometimes laid people off as part of its efforts to make businesses more efficient. "If Governor Romney would give back all the money he's earned from bankrupting companies and laying off employees over the years at Bain, then I would be glad to listen to him," Gingrich said. "But I bet you $10 — not $10,000 — that he won't take the offer." That was a dig at Romney's offer of a $10,000 wager with Rick Perry at Saturday night's debate.

Unbowed, Romney chided Gingrich anew, saying: "There's a big difference between working in the private economy and working on K Street, and working as a lobbyist and working as a legislator, and working to connect businesses with government." Romney's campaign also pressed the notion of Gingrich as a Washington insider, with news releases labeling him an "unreliable leader" and pictured with House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi.
[Reference Here]

If one were to side with the Gingrich argument (in retort), one would be siding with Barack Obama and continue the the cultural and economic slide into the abyss of socialist class-warfare and Euroism. If one were to side with Romney in his attack on Gingrich, while this argument points out how one, as a Washington insider gets to support themselves, it is none of anyone's business what one gets paid for consulting services as long as these arrangements are legal.

What is much more important as a takeaway from Romney's query, however, is with all of the Government resources (read, TAXPAYER) laid at the doorsteps of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, why were the executives who ran Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae able to walk-away while making bonuses in the millions of dollars as these organizations took the worldwide economy into the massive junk-mortgage tailspin of a property value downgrade we find ourselves now? Four words (two hyphenated phrases): Ruling-Class Slush-Fund!

Next debate from Sioux City Convention Center in Sioux City, Iowa, to be aired on FOXNews, Thursday, December 15, 9:00pm ET ... the gloves will be thrown to the ice and it might be time for the more recognized Conservatives as seen in Rick Santorum or Michelle Bachmann to rise above the fray in the ugly, ankle-biting "Newt Romney" back-and-forth, Iowa Caucuses.


<article first published as Mitt - Gingrich Out Demonize Each Other In Obama Style Class Warfare Attacks on Technorati>

Obama's Socialist Re-Branding Of 9/11 Remembrance

President Obama, the First Lady and White House staff observe a moment of silence. Image Credit: White House Photo, Chuck Kennedy, 9/11/09

Obama's Socialist Re-Branding Of 9/11 Remembrance

On the morning of September 11, 2001, four passenger jets were hijacked by islamo-fascist terrorists in a plot devised by al Qaeda to disrupt the economic security of our country and to bring our society down.

Today, eight years later, Barack Obama and his executive Administration are attempting to dilute and hijack the importance of this day that, at best, was an act of war and recast the remembrance of "9/11" into something completely different ... something unrecognizable from its original intent.

This excerpted and edited from Thaindian News-

Obama proclaims 9/11 as “Patriot Day and National Day of Service and Remembrance”
September 11th, 2009 - 2:29 am ICT by BNO News

I call upon all Americans to join in service and honor the lives we lost, the heroes who responded in our hour of need, and the brave men and women in uniform who continue to protect our country at home and abroad. In April, I was proud to sign the bipartisan Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, which recognizes September 11 as a National Day of Service and Remembrance. Originated by the family members of those who lost loved ones on 9/11, the National Day of Service and Remembrance is an opportunity to salute the heroes of 9/11, recapture the spirit of unity and compassion that inspired our Nation following the attacks, and rededicate ourselves to sustained service to our communities.
----
Working together, we can usher in a new era in which volunteering and service is a way of life for all Americans. Deriving strength from tragedy, we can write the next great chapter in our Nation’s history and ensure that future generations continue to enjoy the promise of America.

By a joint resolution approved December 18, 2001 (Public Law 107-89), the Congress has designated September 11 of each year as Patriot Day, and by Public Law 111-13, approved April 21, 2009, has requested the observance of September 11 as an annually recognized National Day of Service and Remembrance.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim September 11, 2009, as Patriot Day and National Day of Service and Remembrance.
----
I invite the Governors of the United States and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and interested organizations and individuals to join in this observance. I call upon the people of the United States to participate in community service in honor of those our Nation lost, to observe this day with other ceremonies and activities, including remembrance services, and to observe a moment of silence beginning at 8:46 a.m. eastern daylight time to honor the innocent victims who perished as a result of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
Reference Here>>

What this recast ... re-branding of the original proclamation for a Patriot Day really means can be found in this following description of an activity that happened only one month ago.

This excerpted and edited from The American Spectator-

Obama's Plan to Desecrate 9/11
By Matthew Vadum on 8.24.09 @ 6:08AM

This effort to reshape the American psyche has nothing to do with healing the nation and everything to do with easing the nation along in the ongoing radical transformation of America that President Obama promised during last year's election campaign. The president signed into law a measure in April that designated Sept. 11 as a National Day of Service, but it's not likely many lawmakers thought this meant that day was going to be turned into a celebration of ethanol, carbon emission controls, and radical community organizing.
----
The administration's plans were outlined in an Aug. 11 White House-sponsored teleconference call run by Obama ally Lennox Yearwood, president of the Hip Hop Caucus, and Liv Havstad, the group's senior vice president of strategic partnerships and programs.
----
The plan is to turn a "day of fear" that helps Republicans into a day of activism called the National Day of Service that helps the left. In other words, nihilistic liberals are planning to drain 9/11 of all meaning.

"They think it needs to be taken back from the right," said the source. "They're taking that day and they're breaking it because it gives Republicans an advantage. To them, that day is a fearful day."

A coalition including the unsavory left-wing pressure group Color of Change and about 60 far-left, environmentalist, labor, and corporate shakedown groups participated in the call. Groups on the call included: ACORN, AFL-CIO, Apollo Alliance, Community Action Partnership, Deep South Center for Environmental Justice, 80 Million Strong for Young American Jobs, Friends of the Earth, Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, Mobilize.org, National Black Police Association, National Coalition on Black Civic Participation, National Council of Negro Women, National Wildlife Federation, RainbowPUSH Coalition, Urban League, and Young Democrats of America.
Reference Here>>

Basically, the new "brown shirt" leagues of the Obama Administration will do anything to hijack any vestige of what would pass for an American culture and patriotism and co-opt the effort to capture private efforts and turn them into service to, and for, the state envisioned by Barack Obama.

The largest insult from all of this activity, is that it assumes that Americans are not giving ... especially not giving to their communities and their neighbors. This assumption shows the depravity of understanding of self-reliant human beings and the cynical political philosophy of the person we have elected to become the 44th President of these United States.

However subtle, this re-branding proclamation of April 21, 2009 and series of conference calls by organizations aligned with the politically radical (communist) left in this country poses a far greater threat to freedom-loving life in this country than anything al Qaeda could muster up at this time. Barack Obama wants to consume and end this Constitutional country from within.

Please, REMEMBER 9/11 for what it really was, an act of war ... and REMEMBER the culture that made this country great.

Ebony & Ivory - Obama Deficits & Bush Deficits Together

In back-to-back press conferences (held Nov. 24, 2008) by Bush (first) and Obama (second), the men either stated or implied that they were sort of working together to muscle the nation through this tough economic period. Bush said, “I talked to Obama about the decision we made. I told the American people, and I told the president-elect when I first met him, that anytime we were to make a big decision during this transition, he will be informed, as will his team.” The plans discussed are still in play to this day during the Obama Administration. Image Credit: St. Louis Post-Dispatch (2008)

Ebony & Ivory - Obama Deficits & Bush Deficits Together

These figures do not live together in perfect harmony here in Carter's Second Term.

Question:

Did you know that the Barack Obama Administration inherited deficits from the previous Bush Administration? Really?!

How can the Obama Administration continue to float the tired old saw that they just happen to inherit large deficits so it will take more just to dig ourselves out?

After sixty short days, the Congress that the Obama Administration actually DID INHERIT, and Barack Obama himself, increased the commitments to spend taxpayer money on social programs alone from the 3% of GDP to 20% of GDP ... or an increase in social spending programs of an eerie 6.66 times greater level.

It is called Deficit Spending (socialism) - and now foreign countries (China and Russia) are suggesting that the world economy adopt a new currency on which to peg/judge the value of other currencies other than the United States dollar - the formally most stable currency in the world.

Graphic showing the Bush Administration and the committed and projected Obama Administration deficits side-by-side. Graphic Credit: The Washington Post via the Heritage Foundation (2009)

This excerpted and edited from the Heritage Foundation -

Bush Deficit vs. Obama Deficit in Pictures
The Heritage Foundation - Posted March 24th, 2009 at 10.20am

President Barack Obama has repeatedly claimed that his budget would cut the deficit by half by the end of his term. But as Heritage analyst Brian Riedl has pointed out, given that Obama has already helped quadruple the deficit with his stimulus package, pledging to halve it by 2013 is hardly ambitious. The Washington Post has a great graphic which helps put President Obama’s budget deficits in context of President Bush’s.

What’s driving Obama’s unprecedented massive deficits? Spending. Riedl details:

* President Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008. President Obama would add another $1 trillion.

* President Bush began a string of expensive financial bailouts. President Obama is accelerating that course.

* President Bush created a Medicare drug entitlement that will cost an estimated $800 billion in its first decade. President Obama has proposed a $634 billion down payment on a new government health care fund.

* President Bush increased federal education spending 58 percent faster than inflation. President Obama would double it.
----
* President Bush tilted the income tax burden more toward upper-income taxpayers. President Obama would continue that trend.

* President Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. Setting aside 2009 (for which Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for an additional $2.6 trillion in public debt), President Obama’s budget would add $4.9 trillion in public debt from the beginning of 2010 through 2016.
Reference Here>>

What the American people inherited with the Clinton and Bush Administrations (and thrust forward with the Obama Administration) were the building blocks of economic slavery and communism.

First, the Government took the position that every person that lived in America (citizen or non-citizen) deserved to be able to participate in home ownership. The Clinton Administration formed the quasi Governmental financial institutions backed by taxpayer money of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to insure low interest loans with reduced qualification requirements. Bonus programs were implemented and paid to the political (Democrat) management of these organizations.

Banks did not want to lend money with this level of low proof, so the management of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae had community development organizations (ACORN) prod them to loan money through lawsuits. In order to fuel demand for these weak mortgages (purchase commitments without the ability or intention to pay), the Government regulating agencies allowed them to be bundled and packaged as grouped financial instruments and sold to the highest bidder through insurance companies and financial institutions (AIG, WAMU, Wachovia, banks in France, Finland, Germany, and etc.).

What triggered this collapse is the increased payment demanded the mortgage companies when the initial period of artificially low inducement interest ran out and the actual value of the house became greater than the mortgage value of the home. People who originally had no real means to afford the home they committed to purchase in the first place, simply walked away with no real damage to their lives leaving all of the intuitions holding the mortgages without an income stream. The asset value of the bundled "Junk Mortgages" dropped and the economic crisis begins.

The sick logic in all of this is that the two-party Bush Government got our economy into this position and now the one-party Obama Government (of Obama/Pelosi/Reid) is smart enough to get us out … with heavier intervention and greater spending commitments - all on the American Taxpayer.

Does anyone in Government realize that this deficit spending of our collective money will all implode eventually?

We, at MAXINE, believe this strategy will turn our currency into the value of the bundled "Junk Mortgages" that helped to put us into this place to start with - all on the back of the Government move toward social engineering!

Let The Revolution Begin

Simpsons characters pictured in a mob revolt with tourches. Image Credit: The Simpsons

Let The Revolution Begin

It's ironic that Barack Obama, whose friends were disciples Saul Alinsky, an ardent social revolutionist, becomes president and sparks a revolution toward conservative American Values.

A revolt might be happening already and the signs of this revolt began yesterday. First in Arizona and Second on the floor of the stock exchange when a reporter for CNBC talked with people who work to invest money ... to make money for their clients and themselves.

The wake-up call is startling in that the mainstream media will not report the groundswell of reaction to the demonization of taxpaying, mortgage paying citizens who are cast a losers in this brand new Obamaworld ... Carter's Second Term.

Protests outside of Dobson Elementary School in Mesa, Arizona where President Barack Obama unveiled his mortgage bailout plan. Photo features "Swastika Guy" and "Hammer-and-Sickle Guy" in close proximity to Fox News contributor Michelle Malkin and Sen. Josh Penry. Image Credit: of ProgressNow Colorado

First, this excerpted and edited from the Arizona Republic -

Ask what the country CAN do for you
by E. J. Montini, The Arizona Republic - Feb. 19, 2009 12:00 AM

President Barack Obama came to ground zero in the foreclosure crisis on Wednesday and offered a mix of government assistance and personal responsibility.

To which a lot of folks in Arizona said: "Nice try, but we ain't buying it."

There's no need for a complicated analysis of Obama's speech.

We can sum up what the president said at Dobson High School in Mesa, as well as the reaction of many local residents, by using two quotes. The first is from Obama, the second from a reader of The Republic responding online to the president's remarks.

OBAMA: "So solving this crisis will require more than resources - it will require all of us to take responsibility.

"Government must take responsibility for setting rules of the road that are fair and fairly enforced.

"Banks and lenders must be held accountable for ending the practices that got us into this crisis in the first place.

"Individuals must take responsibility for their own actions.

"And all of us must learn to live within our means again."

READER: "What about stoops like me that still pay their payments on time and live within their means and didn't buy a pool or a Hummer? I deserve something, don't I?"

After all these years, we appear to have decided that John F. Kennedy was wrong and that we CAN ask what our country can do for us.

Or as another reader put it: "We should all just let our houses go and our jobs, then live off the government and let someone else pay for this turkey's 'stimulus'!"

Obama tried to make the case that we're in this mess together.
----
One man responding to a blog I wrote for azcentral.com said, "Let's get this country back on track and stop the government from trying to be everything to everybody. The Constitution only guarantees 'life, liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness.' "

Another added, "So let's see if I understand - all of us who pay our debts and taxes now get to fund the rescue of homeowners who are upside down. Ummm. I can see a tax revolt forming in the near future."
----
What might work is appealing to our self-interest.
Reference Here>>

CNBC's Rick Santelli, while broadcasting for “Squawk Box” on the floor of the Chicago Board of Trade, called for a referendum to see if we want to "subsidize losers' mortgages" or buy cars and houses in foreclosure and "give them to people who might actually prosper down the road." As traders cheered, he went on to say that we should "reward people that can carry the water instead of drink the water." [click-image to launch video] Image Credit: CNBC via lolfed.com

Second, this excerpted and edited from StreetInsider.com -

Rick Santelli - The Rant Heard 'Round the World'
February 19, 2009 12:24 PM EST

The rant heard 'round the world'. The Drudge Report is highlighting CNBC's Rick Santelli's rant on CNBC this morning ripping Obama's mortgage plan:

'The government is promoting bad behavior... do we really want to subsidize the losers' mortgages... This is America! How many of you people want to pay for your neighbor's mortgage? President Obama are you listening? How about we all stop paying our mortgage! It's a moral hazard'...
Reference Here>>

Video Here

In this 44th Presidency of the United States, people who actually hold a long-term job, invest their money wisely, follow through with their monetary commitments are targeted and become losers (and those who behave in the opposite – Rewarded, with Government money transfer programs).

The economic model for all of this targeted upheaval is found in the principles of Keynesian Economics, a macroeconomic theory based on the ideas of 20th-century British economist John Maynard Keynes. The theory emphasizes the role of demand-side factors, as opposed to supply-side factors, in the determination of aggregate output.

In a nutshell, the value of money is placed not on wealth creation but dollar bill creation. The Government can choose to print the amount of money required to place the economy on a path that the Government feels is the correct path. This is as opposed to a free market determination which recognizes the free will of the consumer and the value of money that is placed in the popularity/supply of an item and the willingness for someone to pay the price someone else is willing to pay.

Even Vladimir Putin is warning the Obama Administration against the downside of a socialist economy stating that it was a “Five Year Plan” central planning Keynesian economic model that brought down the Russian Empire.

Image Credit: The Wall Street Journal Online

Putin Speaks at Davos
The Wall Street Journal - JANUARY 28, 2009, 2:29 P.M. ET

The following text is a transcript of Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's speech at the opening ceremony of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

Good afternoon, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen,
----
Excessive intervention in economic activity and blind faith in the state's omnipotence is another possible mistake.

True, the state's increased role in times of crisis is a natural reaction to market setbacks. Instead of streamlining market mechanisms, some are tempted to expand state economic intervention to the greatest possible extent.

The concentration of surplus assets in the hands of the state is a negative aspect of anti-crisis measures in virtually every nation.

In the 20th century, the Soviet Union made the state's role absolute. In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly. I am sure nobody wants to see it repeated.

Nor should we turn a blind eye to the fact that the spirit of free enterprise, including the principle of personal responsibility of businesspeople, investors and shareholders for their decisions, is being eroded in the last few months. There is no reason to believe that we can achieve better results by shifting responsibility onto the state.

And one more point: anti-crisis measures should not escalate into financial populism and a refusal to implement responsible macroeconomic policies. The unjustified swelling of the budgetary deficit and the accumulation of public debts are just as destructive as adventurous stock-jobbing.
Reference Here>>

CONTEXT QUOTE:

Owners of capital will stimulate the working class to buy more and more of expensive goods, houses and technology, pushing them to take more and more expensive credits, until their debt becomes unbearable.

The unpaid debt will lead to bankruptcy of banks, which will have to be nationalized, and the State will have to take the road which will eventually lead to communism.

Karl Marx, Das Kapital, 1867

The Audacity Of Liberal Defeatist Attitudes

By March or April 2008, the 6000 gold, silver and bronze medals for Beijing 2008 were ready. China Banknote Printing and Minting Corporation in Shanghai, China, was the maker of the medals. /// The raw materials for creating the medals came from BHP’s mines in Chile and Australia. Escondida mine in Chile provides the copper concentrate which contains gold for the gold medals. Spence mining operation, also in Chile, supplies copper cathode which can turn into bronze medals. Cannington mine in Queensland, Australia, supplies silver and lead for crafting silver medals. Image Credit: beijingolympicsfan.com

The Audacity Of Liberal Defeatist Attitudes

In an op-ed piece written by New York Times columnist, Nicholas D. Kristof, we are treated to a world view of praise for the potential growth of China as a country that will own the successes found in the advancement of humanity for the 21st Century.

He sites as part of his arguments … the flexibility of this centralized, totalitarian rule which by its very nature, is inflexible.

Ask the people who traveled to Beijing to see the Olympics … who hold their faith and the book that helps to inform them of their faith in high regard, how flexible the Government of China is after the flexible Government of China stripped them of their Bibles.

He goes on to extol the virtues of a winning China in the Olympics and then lectures us Americans to “Get Used To It”!

The trouble Mr. Kristof has with his analogies and trek through the history of man and his societies is the recognition of the power of the very real flexibility of a government system based on human rights and personal freedom.

Further, he ignores the conservative and competitive spirit of Americans who never assume that they are in the game … any game, to play for Bronze, or Silver – we all play for Gold.

We, at MAXINE just love it when we are lectured by liberals to just accept a future world view that does not have the United States continuing to win … and win big.

"Tank man" blocks a column of tanks heading east on Beijing's Chang'an Boulevard (Avenue of Eternal Peace) near Tiananmen Square during the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989. Image Credit: Jeff Widener - 1989 (The Associated Press)

This excerpted and edited from the New York Times -

China’s Rise Goes Beyond Gold Medals
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF - Published: August 20, 2008

China is on track to displace the United States as the winner of the most Olympic gold medals this year. Get used to it.

Today, it’s the athletic surge that dazzles us, but China will leave a similar outsize footprint in the arts, in business, in science, in education.

The world we are familiar with, dominated by America and Europe, is a historical anomaly. Until the 1400s, the largest economies in the world were China and India, and forecasters then might have assumed that they would be the ones to colonize the Americas — meaning that by all rights this newspaper should be printed in Chinese or perhaps Hindi.
----
Now the world is reverting to its normal state — a powerful Asia — and we will have to adjust. Just as many Americans know their red wines and easily distinguish a Manet from a Monet, our children will become connoisseurs of pu-er tea and will know the difference between guanxi and Guangxi, the Qin and the Qing. When angry, they may even insult each other as “turtle’s eggs.”
----
This transition to Chinese dominance will be a difficult process for the entire international community, made more so by China’s prickly nationalism. China still sees the world through the prism of guochi, or national humiliation, and among some young Chinese success sometimes seems to have produced not so much national self-confidence as cockiness.

China’s intelligence agencies are becoming more aggressive in targeting America, including corporate secrets, and the Chinese military is busily funding new efforts to poke holes in American military pre-eminence.
----
Mr. Bush should have spoken out more forcefully on behalf of human rights, including urging Beijing to stop shipping the weapons used for genocide in Darfur.

It’s a difficult balance to get right, but China’s determination to top the gold medal charts — bespeaks a larger desire for international respect and legitimacy. We can use that desire also to shame and coax better behavior out of China’s leaders.

When the Chinese government sentences two frail women in their late 70s to labor camp because they applied to hold a legal protest during the Olympics, as it just has, then that is an outrage to be addressed not by “silent diplomacy” but by pointing it out.
----
On this visit, I dropped by the home of Bao Tong, a former senior Communist Party official who spent seven years in prison for challenging the hard-liners during the Tiananmen democracy movement. The guards who monitor him 24/7 let me through when I showed my Olympic press credentials.

Mr. Bao noted that Communist leaders used to actually believe in Communism; now they simply believe in Communist Party rule. He recalled that hard-liners used to fret about the danger of “peaceful evolution,” meaning a gradual shift to a Western-style political and economic system. “Now, in fact, what we have is peaceful evolution,” he noted.

That flexibility is one of China’s great strengths, and it’s one reason that the most important thing going on in the world today is the rise of China — in the Olympics and in almost every other facet of life.
Reference Here>>

It is funny how being able to show “guards who monitor him 24/7 let me through when I showed my Olympic press credentials” as being a sign of Communist flexibility when this Communist (Bao Tong) Mr. Kristof is visiting is still under guard (house arrest) in his own country for speaking out about the lack of freedom and the adoption of Western style democracy and human-rights since 1989!

The economic base of China may be shifting to one more closely based on Capitalism (this does not mean we'll be seeing a similar outsize footprint in the arts, in science, in education) but the Government is still a central-rule Communist government where basic human-rights do not exist ... where is the outsized argument/demand for this "flexibility"?

What does this have to do with a possible second term of the Carter Administration? Barack Obama believes that China has a "vastly superior" infrastructure than does the United States.